These are two vey different things. Basically it dependes upon which type of compound one choses to take upādānakkhandha as being, and how to understand this is not just mere dictionary work. It would depend upon how the Buddha described the upādānakkhandhas' function in the suttas.

Maybe you might see what Nanavira says about the subject in Clearing the Path page 26.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

tiltbillings wrote:Maybe you might see what Nanavira says about the subject in Clearing the Path page 26.

I will, but since I have a somewhat unique edition of Clearing The Path (one separated across two books, published by the Buddhist Cultural Centre in Kandy) can you tell me what section or entry it is in, as I predict the page numbers might not line up across the editions.

tiltbillings wrote:These are two vey different things.

Do you wish to elaborate on the differences, and explain the potential variances and implications of the two, as you see them?

tiltbillings wrote:Maybe you might see what Nanavira says about the subject in Clearing the Path page 26.

I will, but since I have a somewhat unique edition of Clearing The Path (one separated across two books, published by the Buddhist Cultural Centre in Kandy) can you tell me what section or entry it is in, as I predict the page numbers might not line up across the editions.

I don't have the book. I am just repeating someone else's footnote. Basically, the point is the pancupādānakkhandha has to do with one still being afflicted by the asavas as opposed to the five khandhas of the arahant with no asavas.

tiltbillings wrote:These are two vey different things.

Do you wish to elaborate on the differences, and explain the potential variances and implications of the two, as you see them?

"appropriated aggregates" or "aggregates of appropriation"

Damdifino. Either we grasp after those things that give us a sense of self or we don't. Whatever sense of self we have is mediated via the khandhas, according to the Buddha:

Monks, whatever contemplatives or priests who assume in various ways when assuming a self, all assume the five clinging-aggregates, or a certain one of them. Which five? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma -- assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.... Owing to the fading of ignorance and the arising of clear knowing, (the thoughts) -- 'I am,' 'I am this,' 'I shall be,' 'I shall not be,' 'I shall be possessed of form,' 'I shall be formless,' 'I shall be percipient (conscious),' 'I shall be non-percipient,' and 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient' -- do not occur to him." SN III 46

I don't think it is "appropriated khandhas": rather, if it is either of these two -- if we are going to use "appropriation", it is the khandhas of appropriation: "assumes form (the body) to be the self, self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form" -- that is, experince is appropriated via the khandhas. The point here is that the khandhas, for the delusional one, are the basis for the misapprehension of reality, giving us: "aggregates of appropriation" The self is - in its various guises -- the add-on to, the misappropriation of, the experience grasped after via the khandhas, keeping in mind that the khandhas are the basis from which we function, either getting lost in delusion or moving towards awakening, which is all probably more than I wanted to say.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

I think it might be worthwhile for us to consider the following sutta tracts, neither of which mention upādāna, and in the context of them, ask the question "would the arahant paññapana (delineate) khandas"?

"Lord, what is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation[2] of the aggregate of form? What is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness?"

"Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, & wind) are the cause, the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of consciousness."

[2] - Delineation (paññapana) literally means, "making discernible." This apparently refers to the intentional aspect of perception, which takes the objective side of experience and fabricates it into discernible objects. In the case of the aggregates, the four great existents, contact, and name-&-form provide the objective basis for discerning them, while the process of fabrication takes the raw material provided by the objective basis and turns it into discernible instances of the aggregates. This process is described in slightly different terms in SN 22.79.

We see here that the different aggregates are personally delineated, based on different experiential conditions. If aggregates need to be delineated to arise, then they cannot be said the exist, separate from and independently of, their delineation.

The Blessed One said: "Monks, there are these five means of propagation. Which five? Root-propagation, stem-propagation, joint-propagation, cutting-propagation, & seed-propagation as the fifth. And if these five means of propagation are not broken, not rotten, not damaged by wind & sun, mature, and well-buried, but there is no earth and no water, would they exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation?"

"No, lord."

"And if these five means of propagation are broken, rotten, damaged by wind & sun, immature, and poorly-buried, but there is earth & water, would they exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation?"

"No, lord."

"And if these five means of propagation are not broken, not rotten, not damaged by wind & sun, mature, and well-buried, and there is earth & water, would they exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation?"

"Yes, lord."

"Like the earth property, monks, is how the four standing-spots for consciousness should be seen. Like the liquid property is how delight & passion should be seen. Like the five means of propagation is how consciousness together with its nutriment should be seen.

"Should consciousness, when taking a stance, stand attached to (a physical) form, supported by form, established on form, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.

"Should consciousness, when taking a stance, stand attached to feeling, supported by feeling, established on feeling, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.

"Should consciousness, when taking a stance, stand attached to perception, supported by perception, established on perception, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.

"Should consciousness, when taking a stance, stand attached to fabrications, supported by fabrications, established on fabrications, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.

"Were someone to say, 'I will describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a growth, an increase, or a proliferation of consciousness apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from fabrications,' that would be impossible.

"If a monk abandons passion for the property of form...

"If a monk abandons passion for the property of feeling...

"If a monk abandons passion for the property of perception...

"If a monk abandons passion for the property of fabrications...

"If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any function, is released. Owing to its release, it is steady. Owing to its steadiness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is totally unbound right within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"

It sounds to me more like it's putthujana onlookers attributing delineating and attributing khandas to the arahant, rather than the arahant doing so to themself. Hence the earlier question...

Are aggregates extant matter and mentality in the past, present and future for us to observe, or are they instead empty appropriations?

retrofuturist wrote:Similarly, if you happen to come across any that disprove or undermine this contention, do please share them with us.

I already have above.

What are you trying to prove? "aggregates [are] extant matter and mentality in the past, present and future for us to observe?"

or

"are they instead empty appropriations?"

The first makes no sense, and the second has been dealt with already in my msg above and the quote (SN III 46). Also, the khandhas are simply a way of talking about experience, having no ultimate reality beyond the conditioned nature that characterizes what we experience. "Empty appropriations? Damifino what you mean my this locution. The is no thing appropriating anything.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

"The the pancupādānakkhandha are what the attavad'upadana depends on, and they are therefore sankhara. But is also with them that atta is identified and they are thus dhamma. The situation, however, is telescoped, for in attavad'upadana, which is a complex affair, what is primarily (though implicitly) identified as atta is upadana, and the pancupādānakkhandha are involved only in the second place. . . . The word upadana (lit. 'taking up') has a certain ambiguity about it. As well as 'holding' (seizing, grasping), which eminently characteristic of fire no less than of passion (the upadana of pancupādānakkhandha is chandaraga, desire-&-lust), the word can also mean the fuel of a fire (MN I 487; SN IV 300-400)." Clearing the Path, page 24 http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/ctp_s ... iew_v1.pdf

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

retrofuturist wrote:. . . It sounds to me more like it's putthujana onlookers attributing delineating and attributing khandas to the arahant, rather than the arahant doing so to themself. Hence the earlier question...

Are aggregates extant matter and mentality in the past, present and future for us to observe, or are they instead empty appropriations?

Metta,Retro.

This question does not make any sense to me. A worldling, by definition, is going to misapprehend reality, but what does that have to to do with how the arahant knows herself to be?

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

tiltbillings wrote:"Empty appropriations? Damifino what you mean my this locution. The is no thing appropriating anything.

True, but there is "appropriating", which one might call "new kamma".

SN 35.145 wrote:"And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech, or with the intellect: This is called new kamma.

There is also the "appropriated", which one might call "old kamma".

SN 35.145 wrote:"Now what, monks, is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma.

tiltbillings wrote:"Empty appropriations? Damifino what you mean my this locution.

If you don't know what it means I don't see how you could claim that any of the previous suttas quoted have refuted it.

I mean appropriations in the sense of having been appropriated, or anything (as per Nanavira), "taken up".

For what it's worth, I don't think SN III 46 supports your suggestion that "the khandhas are the basis from which we function" when the arising of khandas is dependent upon factors which themselves are dependent upon avijja (e.g. phassa, nama-rupa as shown in MN 109). Arahants do not function dependent upon avijja.

Furthermore, if we needed them to function, their cessation could not be observed. Yet...

Satipatthana Sutta wrote:"Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five clinging-aggregates. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five clinging-aggregates? There is the case where a monk [discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception... Such are fabrications... Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'

"In this way he remains focused internally on the mental qualities in & of themselves, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five clinging-aggregates.

tiltbillings wrote:"Empty appropriations? Damifino what you mean my this locution. The is no thing appropriating anything.

True, but there is "appropriating", which one might call "new kamma".

Well, maybe, but as a way of talking about this I'll stick with the more traditional take for upadana as outlined by Nanavira and all that I said above. I do not think he is saying: "appropriated aggregates," but he is saying, in terms of upādānakkhandha: ""aggregates of appropriation": "The pancupādānakkhandha are what the attavad'upadana depends on, and they are therefore sankhara." And he neatly points out: "The word upadana (lit. 'taking up') has a certain ambiguity about it. As well as 'holding' (seizing, grasping), which eminently characteristic of fire no less than of passion (the upadana of pancupādānakkhandha is chandaraga, desire-&-lust), the word can also mean the fuel of a fire .

At best, your position could be admitted as a variation, but likely this compound, upādānakkhandha, is to be read as khandhas of grasping/fuel or khandhas affected by grasping. It is certainly what the texts point to, and it is certainly what Nanavira points to.

One might talk about "appropriated aggregates" (though I have not a clue as to what it means in terms of the suttas terminology), but then that seems to miss entirely the function of the khandhas that is suggested, in the suttas by the term upādānakkhandha being the fuel (SN IV 399-400 and SN III 46) for the arising of attavad'upadana. The highly important and highly graphic idea of fuel gets lost in the passive, past tense "appropriated aggregates."

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

Ñāṇananda has quite a dif­fer­ent view from the stan­dard Ther­avadin inter­pre­ta­tion which is closer to naïve real­ism. It is also opposed to Ven. Ñāṇavīra Thera’s expla­na­tions, and read­ers who are famil­iar with Clear­ing the Path would notice that Bhante Ñāṇananda’s inter­pre­ta­tion is close to Sis­ter Vajira’s ear­lier views. It is easy to see why Bhante is some­times accused of being a viññāṇavādin by those who are less will­ing to con­sider the sub­tleties involved.

“So where does pañcupādā­nakkhandha come in? Pañcupādā­nakkhandhā is the final result of the con­stant tus­sle between viññāṇa and nāma-rūpa. This is made clear in the Mahāsaḷāyatanika Sutta. What is gath­ered from the six viññāṇa–s, at the end, are fil­tered down to things grasped as “these are my forms, these are my feel­ings, these are my perceptions, …

Ñāṇananda has quite a dif­fer­ent view from the stan­dard Ther­avadin inter­pre­ta­tion which is closer to naïve real­ism. It is also opposed to Ven. Ñāṇavīra Thera’s expla­na­tions, and read­ers who are famil­iar with Clear­ing the Path would notice that Bhante Ñāṇananda’s inter­pre­ta­tion is close to Sis­ter Vajira’s ear­lier views. It is easy to see why Bhante is some­times accused of being a viññāṇavādin by those who are less will­ing to con­sider the sub­tleties involved.

“So where does pañcupādā­nakkhandha come in? Pañcupādā­nakkhandhā is the final result of the con­stant tus­sle between viññāṇa and nāma-rūpa. This is made clear in the Mahāsaḷāyatanika Sutta. What is gath­ered from the six viññāṇa–s, at the end, are fil­tered down to things grasped as “these are my forms, these are my feel­ings, these are my perceptions, …

Okay, but I still see here no justification for reading upādā­nakkhandhā in the past tense as "appropriated khandhas." My preference is to see the language of the suttas a bit more dynamically. Upādā­na, fuel, was used very deliberately by the Buddha to make a point about the khandhas. My guess is that our opinions are going to be at variance.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

Dwelling at Savatthi. There the Blessed One said to the monks: "In one who keeps focusing on the allure of clingable phenomena (or: phenomena that offer sustenance = the five aggregates), craving develops. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering & stress.

"Just as if a great mass of fire of ten... twenty... thirty or forty cartloads of timber were burning, and into it a man would time & again throw dried grass, dried cow dung, & dried timber, so that the great mass of fire — thus nourished, thus sustained — would burn for a long, long time. In the same way, in one who keeps focusing on the allure of clingable phenomena, craving develops. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering & stress.

"Now, in one who keeps focusing on the drawbacks of clingable phenomena, craving ceases. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging, illness & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress.

"Just as if a great mass of fire of ten... twenty... thirty or forty cartloads of timber were burning, into which a man simply would not time & again throw dried grass, dried cow dung, or dried timber, so that the great mass of fire — its original sustenance being consumed, and no other being offered — would, without nutriment, go out. In the same way, in one who keeps focusing on the drawbacks of clingable phenomena, craving ceases. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging, illness & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress."

tiltbillings wrote:Okay, but I still see here no justification for reading upādā­nakkhandhā in the past tense as "appropriated khandhas."

By "appropriated khandhas" I didn't mean just past ones at the exclusion of active appropriations. It's both the "old kamma" (old appropriations) which in the above example would constitute to the "cartloads of timber", and the "new kamma" (new appropriations) as well, which in the above example would be "time & again throw dried grass, dried cow dung, & dried timber". As in the simile, it's both. Only once both are exhausted does the flame goes out, and then there is nibbana. Note: nibbana (cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress) occurs before the (conventionally defined) death of the arahant... not afterwards, thereby giving a clue as to what it is that goes out.

tiltbillings wrote: My guess is that our opinions are going to be at variance.

retrofuturist wrote:Are aggregates extant matter and mentality in the past, present and future for us to observe, or are they instead empty appropriations?

What I remember reading in CMA is that ALL aggregates except for maggaphala cittas are subject to being clung to, even those aggregates of an Arahant can be clung to [by others?].

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."